Clearly, an inadequate system

Germanwings crash: victims' relatives say Lufthansa should have stopped pilot flying | World news | The Guardian

I wonder what the situation is in Australia, and other countries, regarding notification doctors can give to an employer of a employee's psychiatric state.

While not every employer needs to be kept in the loop, surely for those employees who work in an industry with the safety of others in their hands should expect that their employer should know of their doctor's concerns that they have psychosis. 

A weird place

Now, I don't care for snakes as much as the next city bred wimpy male who gets enough of a fright when seeing a blue tongue lizard head poking out from the undergrowth, but reading about this public festival of snake killing and skinning in Texas still made me feel queasy.    Are enthusiastic public tours of abattoirs a "thing" in Texas, too?

Bar

Had a beer here this afternoon.  it's The Charming Squire, the James Squire pub in a corner of the Brisbane Convention Centre, opposite South Bank, and it's ridiculously, incredibly, popular.


 The James Squire range of beers is reliably good: it's the craft beer-ish style beer you have when you aren't really in a craft beer pub.  I've been to this pub a few times, and I would love to see how much money they bank each day. 

The company could surely not be more pleased with how it's going.

Oh look...the entrance to the Prime Minister's office while Tony Abbott had the job....

The confusion continues

Feminists should speak up about Credlin, and the creeps should close their mouths

Seems to me that Jacqueline Maley writes a column that makes sense until half way through, then goes off the rails.

She claims:

Call it a failure of the imagination, but it still seems we can only understand a woman's power over a man in terms of sex.

Oh, bulldust.   I'm sure Margaret Thatcher had a powerful sway over her (mostly male?) cabinet during most of her Prime Ministership, and no one thought she was sleeping with them.  

And this:

The former prime minister, so beholden to his Amazonian chief of staff,
the Wallis Simpson over whom he lost his reason, is somehow exculpated
from the enormously bad decision-making which characterised his tenure.

Double bulldust!  I reckon this is just feminist reading between the lines to work up something to be offended about.  It seems to me that in everything she says, Savva argues that it was Abbott's fault for not remedying the poisonous situation that everyone (from John Howard down) was bringing to his attention. 

The best looking McDonalds in the world, I'm guessing

McDonald’s on Paris’ Champs-Elysees gets an upscale makeover.

Look at the photos.  It's ridiculously gorgeous.

(I had a particularly nice "Create Your Own" last Saturday, too.  The only thing wrong with the stores now is the annoying way the menu screen cycles every 8 seconds before you've had a chance to read everything.)

Um, maybe she was just a terrible Chief of Staff?

It's pretty hilarious, really.

Andrew Bolt cannot understand why Liberal women are not rushing to defend Peta Credlin  as an unfairly "smeared" sister worthy of support.

Why does he refuse to believe what this plainly suggests:  that Credlin was a terrible Chief of Staff who everyone (bar Abbott) could see was causing massive harm,  and that it's not about sexism at all.

And having said that, of course Abbott can take prime responsibility for the situation, as he is clearly incapable of making good judgements about who to listen to.

[Bolt also runs with approval a patently silly piece from The Age in which it is noted that Tony Blair had the sort of relationship with his (male) chief of staff such that they would discuss things while Blair was in various states of undress, including nude apparently.   So, hey, why should Liberal MP's look askance at famous "man's man" Abbott slapping his COS on the backside, or watching her put her head on his shoulder?   If he had her in the bathroom while he was having a shower, nothing wrong with that because guys are sometimes nude in front of guys and what's the difference?    Really, Andrew, you're a dill being sucked in by feminist false equivalence.]

Blood pressure alert

Every time I see Simon Chapman's head appearing on an anti smoking article (today, at The Conversation), I imagine an unhealthy rise in the blood pressure of Sinclair Davidson, and a mad rush to find something in it to nitpick about in a post that no one will care about at Catallaxy. 

It amuses me, somewhat.

The complicated radiation story

Is Fukushima's exclusion zone doing more harm than radiation? - BBC News

At the end of this article, which has one expert questioning why the Japanese government is setting such a relatively low level of background radiation as being needed before residents can return to land around Fukushima, there is this caution:

Of course this is a ferociously complex issue, and many will argue that I
am ignoring the dangers of "hot spots" and from ingesting radioactive
Caesium particles in food or water or dust. But five years after the
meltdowns at Fukushima 100,000 people are still unable to go home. That
is a massive human tragedy.

Yes, it seems to me (without knowing anything concrete about this) that the matter of how a background radiation level is being maintained is important.  If you live in an area where the rocks and minerals around you are naturally radiative, but are in a more or less solid state, wouldn't that be better than being in an area with a lower background reading that's come from dust that descended from the sky?   Because I would have guessed that getting that dust into your lungs is likely to do worse damage than standing near (say) a block of granite that has a naturally high reading.

But how do scientists take this difference (assuming I'm making a legitimate point) into account when declaring an area safe or not for long term residence?   Surely it's hard to measure the likelihood of dust ingestion?

Textor makes some enemies

Liberal strategist Mark Textor seems to have no love for the IPA, so he goes up a notch in credibility:

Wide-ranging changes introduced by Tony Abbott, such as the potential deregulation of universities, were the result of a broken political system where considered and experienced policy wonks were overlooked, Textor argued.

“During the time of great estrangement during the Abbott years, the reality is people who are close to the machine like myself thought that many of the reforms ... we were getting were completely out of step,” he said. “Don’t assume the government’s agenda and the political agenda are the same because governments aren’t political parties and their agendas are quite different.”

Instead, “21-year-old pimply theorists from the IPA [Institute of Public Affairs] and the Australia Institute” with little real-world experience have been running the show, Textor said.

I'm guessing he must be grinding his teeth about James Paterson's grab of the top Victorian Senate seat then.

Satellite or surface temperatures

A really clear video here explaining why the surface temperature record is way more robust than the satellite record.   Information totally lost on the highly dislikeable Ted Cruz, of course.

Sounds promising

10 Cloverfield Lane Reviews - Metacritic

The story sounds a bit Twilight Zone-ish, and I think I want to see it.  (I've always liked John Goodman, too, so it's nice to see him being a lead actor with a lot of screen time.)

Runs in the family

Second Wachowski Sibling Comes Out as Transgender Woman - The New York Times

OK, surely we must be at Peak Transgender?

No, wait on...

When Donald Trump becomes President, and then uses an Address to the Nation to declare he cannot hide the truth behind his unmanly tiny hands any more, and he will forthwith be known as "Ms President Donna Trump" - then we will have reached the peak.

Noooooooooooooooooo!

By rights, I should refuse to publicise this study.  On the other hand, out of respect and love for the work of Steven Spielberg, I have been thinking of having an "ET on a flying bike" tattoo, positioned so that my butt can look like the moon it's flying over:*

There's no known cure for the common cold, but receiving multiple tattoos can strengthen your immunological responses, potentially making you heartier in fighting off common infections, according to research by a trio of University of Alabama scholars. 

*  I may not be being serious.

Weird blindness of the Right

What fun it is to watch the outrage of frustrated Abbott lovers (and Turnbull haters - he believes in global warming, after all) over the Niki Savva book.   (Which, it would seem, has been selling like hotcakes.  I'm even tempted myself.)

Rowan Dean, about the most obnoxious of right wing warrior commentators in Australia at the moment, is quoted by Bolt as writing:

Moreover, in interviews Ms Savva has repeatedly trotted out the claim that Ms Credlin attempted to have herself and Peter van Onselen fired from the Australian (an irrelevance given they are both still there), as an excuse for not following the normal procedure of putting allegations of an affair to her two subjects prior to publication.

Um, it's more than "a claim":  in the Australian this morning she has the communication from then editor Mitchell confirming that not only had Credlin demanded it, but Abbott was on the case too!

And, quite frankly, your average person might think it is a pretty damn good reason for a writer not to bother asking them about an affair, especially when the claim in the book is not even that there were having one, but that a large slab of their own party thought it looked that way and that it was causing problems within the government.  (And Abbott's - and I think Credlin's? -  denials to the messenger is in the book too.)    Working up indignation about her not asking them is therefore just piffle.

As for the hypocrisy of all of this - a word Bolt is flinging around with his lack of insight - I thought Righties considered it an outrage when Gillard did her nut at The Australian for running a Milne piece which contained a claim that had previously been nixed by their lawyers as defamatory.   We don't know if she asked for his sacking, but he got sacked, and then this was supposed to be the biggest outrage to freedom of speech ever.

Now, clear evidence that Credlin (and possibly Abbott) was specifically telling Mitchell to sack Savva for her reporting unfriendly stories, and we're supposed to feel sorry for Peta??

Gillard, as her reward for being uppity about a report she didn't like, got a plethora of Right wing purely politically motivated witch hunting lasting years over allegations involving her love life  20 years ago, which had already been aired and denied about (I think) 12 years ago, and which Bolt chose to help re-publicise.   The end result was always predictable - if none of her internal enemies had evidence 12 years ago, they were hardly likely to turn it up now.  And the relevance of this to how she was doing her job now - precisely nil.   (The relevance of the Abbott/Credlin relationship - huge within his own party, right now.)  The only good thing to come out of it was the utter humiliation of Michael Smith.

The right wing pundits are absurd.   (Oh, and to be fair, so is Bernard Keane on this.  He's way off mark on this.)

Filming has started

Star Wars redux: Send in the Clones . . . to Donegal

It would appear that the filming for the next Star Wars has started on the island where the last one ended.

How unusually chronological of them, for movie makers...

Heh

US pro-gun activist mother shot - by her four-year-old son

She's not dead, so it's OK to laugh.

Good Lord! Another columnist I wouldn't normally recommend...

...is Miranda Devine, but her take on the matter of Credlin/Abbott/various Lefty, feminist commentators' complaint that this is a matter of sexist attack is actually pretty good.   Also a bit funny (unintentionally, I think) in part:

She has denied the rumours and that should be the end of speculation based on evidence amounting to no more than Credlin feeding Abbott off her fork, buying them matching Tumi luggage, holidaying together, and various other tidbits, mainly unsourced, which have swirled around Canberra for years.

Yes, because a male boss and his female chief of staff holidaying together with matching luggage is never a reason to suspect something going on...

Anyhow, the bits I more-or-less approve of:

Savva’s book documents the avoidable trajectory of his downfall, with on-the-record recollections which fill in details about Credlin’s questionable behaviour and dominance of Abbott.

Despite the damage she was doing, Credlin remained in her job. Her response to criticism was to play the gender card. Abbott’s indulgence of this nonsense was surreal as he castigated his colleagues as sexist. “Do you really think that my chief of staff would be under this criticism if her name was P-e-t-e-r and not P-e-t-a?” he asked the ABC in 2014.

The week after Abbott was dumped, Credlin spoke at an Australian Women’s Weekly event and also blamed criticism of her on sexism. She also made the extraordinarily self-aggrandising claim that she “got them into government, from opposition I might add.”

Credlin’s harshest critics were women, not because they are self loathing misogynists, but because men are cowed into silence by exactly the arguments she mounts. Criticise a woman and it’s sexism. Criticise a man and it’s criticism.

Credlin continued to play the gender card yesterday in a column, saying she wasn’t the first woman to be attacked about the “nature of her professional relationships, and sadly I doubt I will be the last”. Abbott’s not the first man either, so it’s hardly a gender issue.

What a farce

Turnbull heckled by own party as NSW Liberals vote for climate debates - 9news.com.au: Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has reportedly been heckled by parts of his party at a meeting where NSW Liberals voted for his government to conduct public debates about climate change and whether the science is settled.

An overwhelming majority voted in favour of the motion at the party's state council meeting on the NSW central coast following a speech by Mr Turnbull at the weekend, revealing the persisting level of climate change scepticism among the party, the Sydney Morning Herald reports.

I am reminded of John Quiggin's "Parallel Universes" post of yesterday, too.

I think the right side of politics here is caught in the sort of credibility crisis that Labor suffered in the 50's and 60's, when (if I understand history correctly), it was hard to support a party that harboured too many with an intellectual sympathy to communism.

The climate change skeptics have to be purged before the Coalition can regain true credibility for political judgement.   As many of them are IPA influenced, and the nearest party to that mob is the LDP, they should be told to go join Leyonhjelm's outfit and follow him into electoral oblivion.

A Trump comparison

Boy, it's been many a year since I've recommended a Bret Stephens piece from the Wall Street Journal, but I think he makes many good points in this anti-Trump piece "The Return of the 1930s", which starts this way:

In temperament, he was “bombastic, inconsistent, shallow and vainglorious.” On political questions, “he made up his own reality as he went along.” Physically, the qualities that stood out were “the scowling forehead, the rolling eyes, the pouting mouth.” His “compulsive exhibitionism was part of his cult of machismo.” He spoke “in short, strident sentences.” Journalists mocked his “absurd attitudinizing.”

Remind you of someone?

The description of Benito Mussolini comes from English historian Piers Brendon’s definitive history of the 1930s, “The Dark Valley.” So does this mean that Donald Trump is the second coming of Il Duce, or that yesteryear’s Fascists are today’s Trumpkins? Not exactly. But that doesn’t mean we should be indifferent to the parallels with the last dark age of Western politics.

Stephens then goes to note how the current period of economic problems do not go anywhere near matching those of the 1920's and 30's.  In fact, he goes on to point to the positives in the American economy, as a way of deflating the Trump fanbase's feelings that the country needs a new, quasi-fascist,  style of leaderhsip.

But - and here's the big but - why doesn't Stephens then go onto to acknowledge that the Republican's own hyperbola about the economic crisis Obama was allegedly causing was not well founded, and it is their own behaviour that has caused the rise of the Trump base?